David McGoldrick on Robert Peston

[FMBlade1]

What have you got to hide ?

If it's racist to ask for ID to vote (like in Georgia), could it also not be argued that it's racist for ID to have to be supplied for having a voice online?

Minorities are significantly less likely to have ID so requiring it will make social media less diverse and will effectively ban people of colour, it's like a Jim Crow suggestion.

 

[Rodders]

Ask Billy Sharp

Is he abused because of the colour of his skin?

 

[HeCanDoMagic]

What sort of abuse do white footballers get?

Are you serious?

 

[Guesty]

Freedom of Speech might be a 'right' (only to some degree, and a lot of people are guilty of confusing American freedom of speech with English Law) but 'being on social media' certainly isn't.

 

[FMBlade1]

Nah sorry I get what you're saying but that's a pretty week argument for the abuse, not just racist, that's dished out on SM on a daily basis.

If SM had proper identification in place across the board corrupt governments wouldn't have the resources to silence all the dissenters so I think it's a good move compared to letting the racist, homophobic cunts carry on as normal.

They don't need to silence the dissenters, they just need to get to a handful of them and make an example out of them to deter the rest. Happens in Russia/Iran etc. all the time.

Of course the abuse is horrible and unacceptable, though human nature is terrible so these things are inevitable unfortunately. That's not the same as accepting it of course, but no-one ever says 'It's the 2021 there's no room for murder'.

 

[Deadly_D'Jaffo]

What sort of abuse do white footballers get?

 

[Blade.com]

What sort of abuse do white footballers get?

What sort of abuse do white footballers get?

Type in John Lundstram. The worse abuse I witnessed of any footballer in 60 years was at Elland Road towards Dean Henderson full 90 minutes of it and after all that he kept a clean sheet: well done Dean to put in a performance like that must have taken some character. Abuse is abuse is abuse. Dont know why we have to discriminate abuse.

 

[FMBlade1]

On a different point, I am staggered that clubs have not used this time to upgrade their stadium surveillance.

In the aisles there should be video and audio recording capturing every seat, so every time someone says something abusive they automatically get thrown out for life.

I remember I was at Brighton once and heard a homophobic comment behind me. I turned around and couldn't see who made it. The stewards didn't notice it. If there were proper surveillance it would have easily have been picked up.

Clubs, especially PL ones, have so much resources it's a no-brainer really and the players could chip in a week's wages if it's an issue.

 

[bongleblade]

What have you got to hide ?

It's nothing about hiding... but they would sell your data to the highest bidder. No more privacy - could be sold to China, Russia, NK. Huge no go in my opinion

 

[sitwell]

It's nothing about hiding... but they would sell your data to the highest bidder. No more privacy - could be sold to China, Russia, NK. Huge no go in my opinion

Im sure the Chinese and Russians are massively interested in you and therefore simply dont go on twitter

 

[Klaatu Barada Nikto]

Are you serious?

I'm not denying they get abuse.

 

[FMBlade1]

It's nothing about hiding... but they would sell your data to the highest bidder. No more privacy - could be sold to China, Russia, NK. Huge no go in my opinion

And even if they didn't sell it, there will be massive cyber-hacks like the ones USA government security systems experienced in January. If they can't prevent it what chance would Twitter have?

I understand that people are rightly very upset about abuse on the internet but there are no easy solutions and it merits a calm consideration as far as policy goes.

 

[Klaatu Barada Nikto]

James McClean got terrible sectarian abuse for years and there was no boycotts or outrage.

Ched Evans has had the same for different reasons even after his conviction was quashed.

It shouldn't be normalized or accepted but it does happen to everyone, though to different degrees of course.

James Mclean, you have a point.

But are you seriously comparing the abuse David McGoldrick gets that's connected to the colour of his skin, to the abuse that Ched Evans got for turning up uninvited to a hotel room at 3am and sticking his dick in a drunk lass without even saying a word to her?

 

[FMBlade1]

James Mclean, you have a point.

But are you seriously comparing the abuse David McGoldrick gets that's connected to the colour of his skin, to the abuse that Ched Evans got for turning up uninvited to a hotel room at 3am and sticking his dick in a drunk lass without even saying a word to her?

As I clearly stated, 'to different degrees'.

Ched got abused by being called a rapist when in fact he was innocent in the eyes of the law and had served a prison sentence and was public enemy number 1 for years: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36930021 (BBC being polite in reporting)

He was hounded out of various potential returns to football before he was cleared, a fate that the guilty sex offender Marlon King was not subject to...

(In fact King even scored under the Jessica Ennis stand and she said nothing)

You can say that Ched's behaviour was scummy, I agree. To call him a rapist it for it, that's abuse.

 

[Fulwood Blade]

Interesting article in todays paper, especially the response from twitter & instagram.

The problem will continue until these companies are responsible for the content published and not as now just seen as the vehicle for publication.

It's a slow burner, but it will happen.

 

[FMBlade1]

Interesting article in todays paper, especially the response from twitter & instagram.

The problem will continue until these companies are responsible for the content published and not as now just seen as the vehicle for publication.

It's a slow burner, but it will happen.

Twitter should explain how this happened last night:



It'll never happen in the USA that section 230 is changed and these companies become responsible.

Clive Lewis MP should also have been banned by likening the Race Commission, made up of people of colour, to the KKK:

 

[Edgar Allan Poo]

Type in John Lundstram. The worse abuse I witnessed of any footballer in 60 years was at Elland Road towards Dean Henderson full 90 minutes of it and after all that he kept a clean sheet: well done Dean to put in a performance like that must have taken some character. Abuse is abuse is abuse. Dont know why we have to discriminate abuse.

Couldn't agree more about abuse. It should be a level playing field issue.

 

[ChipButtyBlade]

 

[HeCanDoMagic]

I'm not denying they get abuse.

What were you actually saying then?

 

[Cheesebored]

What sort of abuse do white footballers get?

None at all...

 

[Ernest]

I came off all social media sites last year as I felt they were all toxic cesspits infested with pond scum.

These morons abusing people online behind an avatar should be named and shamed. The social media sites aren’t doing enough and quite frankly it’s disgusting.

Well done, Didzy.

 

[Klaatu Barada Nikto]

What were you actually saying then?

I'm asking what the nature of the abuse is that white footballers get. Is it related to their performances or the colour of their skin?

 

[bartman]

There are people who wouldn’t be able to use social media safely without anonymity.

Ok although that will be very fee people and for legitimate reasons. But if someone is abusing others, why should they be allowed to remain anonymous. Surely Social Media companies can confirm the reasons why someone can be annonymous and protect them whilst exposing those that need to be exposed.

 

[FMBlade1]

I came off all social media sites last year as I felt they were all toxic cesspits infested with pond scum.

These morons abusing people online behind an avatar need naming and shaming. The social media sites aren’t doing enough and quite frankly it’s disgusting.

Well done, Didzy.

Even if those involved are 12 years old, as has what has happened recently? Does naming and shaming stop this abuse? It will stop these people getting jobs which in turn could lead to more serious crimes, name and shame might make us feel better and the culprits worse but it doesn't solve the problem.

The companies should certainly be quicker in banning people and use more resources, and maybe ban certain emojis.

What I would controversial suggest is that people stop talking about. These scumbags craze attention, and love it to make people upset. So what do footballers do?

They go on TV and say how upset they are, and the cycle continues. I understand it's not easy to stay silent but that might be the best option for everyone.

These footballers can hire people to block people on their accounts in the meantime.

 

[FMBlade1]

Ok although that will be very fee people and for legitimate reasons. But if someone is abusing others, why should they be allowed to remain anonymous. Surely Social Media companies can confirm the reasons why someone can be annonymous and protect them whilst exposing those that need to be exposed.

If you remove anonymity there will be safeguarding implications as predators can track down/threaten under 18's more easily.

There are billions of people who need anonymity, media companies even as large as they are won't be able to tell who does and who does not need it.

 

[bartman]

we are talking about Facebok, Twitter, Tik Tok etc requiring photographic ID to join. Providing photo ID to these corporations who exploit data to access means of free speech

And the problem with proving who you are is what exactly ? How would providing ID prevent any of us having free speech ? If you arent glong to racially abuse, incite terrorism and violence etc, why would it be a problem. ? If you dont like having to ID yourself on social media you don't use it.

 

[FMBlade1]

And the problem with proving who you are is what exactly ? How would providing ID prevent any of us having free speech ? If you arent glong to racially abuse, incite terrorism and violence etc, why would it be a problem. ? If you dont like having to ID yourself on social media you don't use it.

Asking for ID is racist apparently, like the Georgia Jim Crow laws being introduced currently by Republicans.

This is because minorities and/or people of colour disproportionately do not have access to ID. So requiring ID to get on social media, a platform for free speech, is arguably racist.

 

[bartman]

If you remove anonymity there will be safeguarding implications as predators can track down/threaten under 18's more easily.

There are billions of people who need anonymity, media companies even as large as they are won't be able to tell who does and who does not need it.

Preditors are targeting under 18s now and many get away with it because they are annonymous. They set up a fake profile and groom them. We need to protect the victims and not the criminals.
Who are the billoons of people that need to be annonymon social media ?

 

[TJB.]

What were you actually saying then?

Is it not completely obvious what he was getting at?

White footballers don't get abused for being white. It doesn't happen. They get pelters for a whole host of other reasons, but not for their race.

 

[Edgar Allan Poo]

Football fans are some of the worst for hurling abuse of course. From now on I intend to reform so from now on when Lundstrum is back peddling I will call out (but without raising my voice) "I say Mr Lundstrum would you mind terribly terribly awfully terribly helping your team mates achieve their modest targets there's a good chap." There, feeling better about myself already...